My current anecdotal conclusion for the benefits of the revised spatial filtering (RV vs RIV) is with very dim and obscured objects such as space dust which the Riv struggled with. ~20min at f2 can give you a lot of space dust!
11:24 no, it’s not. And it costs the idiots that pay for that light much more money in the long run than installing properly shielded lighting fixtures. But the ones installing the lights are not the ones paying for the electricity, so they install the cheapest ones possible, and here we are. There is no pressure from the public to reduce the waste, because no human sees those lights from above except when flying, and they look pretty from the air, so those who could make things better never receive any complaints, except from a few lunatics like us, who always have their eyes pointed upwards. The damage to wildlife and the loss of the night sky are never factored in the decisions that lead to those light installations
Yeah, it's a total bummer. My local astronomy club has made some strides in getting some light pollution under control at various areas locally over the years. In all cases the thing that makes a difference is convincing the decision makers that it's in their own personal interests to tamp down the lights. This spot might be one convincing conversation away from meaningful change, its hard to know.
My current anecdotal conclusion for the benefits of the revised spatial filtering (RV vs RIV) is with very dim and obscured objects such as space dust which the Riv struggled with. ~20min at f2 can give you a lot of space dust!
It’s definitely a boon across the board for astro work. I’m glad they reworked it
11:24 no, it’s not. And it costs the idiots that pay for that light much more money in the long run than installing properly shielded lighting fixtures. But the ones installing the lights are not the ones paying for the electricity, so they install the cheapest ones possible, and here we are.
There is no pressure from the public to reduce the waste, because no human sees those lights from above except when flying, and they look pretty from the air, so those who could make things better never receive any complaints, except from a few lunatics like us, who always have their eyes pointed upwards.
The damage to wildlife and the loss of the night sky are never factored in the decisions that lead to those light installations
Yeah, it's a total bummer. My local astronomy club has made some strides in getting some light pollution under control at various areas locally over the years. In all cases the thing that makes a difference is convincing the decision makers that it's in their own personal interests to tamp down the lights. This spot might be one convincing conversation away from meaningful change, its hard to know.